πŸ›‘οΈ Public data only β€” no PHI permitted on this instance.
SC
SeekingChartis
CCN 231306 | MI | 15 beds | Current EBITDA $695K β†’ Pro Forma $4.0M (+$3.3M)
$62.2M
Net Revenue HCRIS
$695K
Current EBITDA COMPUTED
+$3.3M
RCM EBITDA Uplift
$4.0M
Pro Forma EBITDA
+526bps
Margin Improvement
$2.4M
WC Released (1x)

Bridge Realization Estimate

ML model predicts what fraction of the bridge is achievable (accuracy: 60%, n=5,839)

65%
Realization (C)
$3.3M
Modeled Uplift
$2.1M
Risk-Adjusted
-$1.2M
Execution Discount
Occupancy RateLower Occupancy Rate reduces execution likelihood
Revenue per BedHigher Revenue per Bed increases execution likelih
Bed CountHigher Bed Count increases execution likelihood
Net-to-Gross RatioHigher Net-to-Gross Ratio reduces execution likeli
Scale (Log Beds)Scale (Log Beds) has minimal effect on execution

Expected realization: 65% of modeled bridge. Strengths: Revenue per Bed, Bed Count. Risks: Occupancy Rate, Net-to-Gross Ratio. Risk-adjusted uplift: $2.1M (vs $3.3M modeled).

EBITDA Bridge β€” 7 RCM Levers

Each bar shows the annual EBITDA impact at full run-rate. Revenue levers increase top-line; cost levers reduce operating expense; cash acceleration releases working capital. Calibrated to published research bands (Denial 12%β†’5% = $8-15M on $400M NPR).

Cost to Collect
Cost Savings | 12mo ramp
$1.2M
+200bp
Denial Rate Reduction
Revenue | 12mo ramp
$1.2M
+198bp
A/R Days Reduction
Cash Accel | 9mo ramp
$757K
+122bp
Clean Claim Rate
Cost Savings | 6mo ramp
$40K
+6bp
Total EBITDA Impact$3.3M

Lever Detail

Each value shows its data source. SELLER = seller data room, DEFAULT = model default, BENCHMARK = P75 peer benchmark.

LeverCurrentTargetRevenueCostEBITDAWCRamp
Cost to Collect4.5% DEFAULT2.5% BENCHMARK$0$1.2M$1.2M$012mo
Denial Rate Reduction12.0% DEFAULT6.5% BENCHMARK$1.2M$34K$1.2M$012mo
A/R Days Reduction52.00 DEFAULT38.00 BENCHMARK$191K$566K$757K$2.4M9mo
Clean Claim Rate88.0% DEFAULT96.0% BENCHMARK$0$40K$40K$06mo
Net Collection Rate93.5% DEFAULT58.1% BENCHMARK$0$0$0$018mo
CDI / Case Mix Index135.0% DEFAULT142.0% BENCHMARK$0$0$0$018mo

Implementation Timing Curve

Linear ramp to full run-rate per lever. Month 0 = close date. Partners should expect 60-70% of total uplift realized by month 12.

LeverM0M3M6M9M12M18M24M36
Cost to Collect$0$311K$622K$934K$1.2M$1.2M$1.2M$1.2M
Denial Rate Reduction$0$308K$616K$924K$1.2M$1.2M$1.2M$1.2M
A/R Days Reduction$0$252K$505K$757K$757K$757K$757K$757K
Clean Claim Rate$0$20K$40K$40K$40K$40K$40K$40K
Cumulative$0$892K$1.8M$2.7M$3.3M$3.3M$3.3M$3.3M

Returns Sensitivity (IRR / MOIC)

5-year hold, 5.5x leverage, 3% organic growth, 10%/yr debt paydown. Green = exceeds 20% IRR hurdle. Amber = 15-20%. Red = below hurdle or loss. RCM uplift of $3.3M is added at exit.

Entry \ Exit9.0x10.0x11.0x11.5x12.0x
8.0x109% / 39.7x114% / 44.5x118% / 49.2x120% / 51.6x122% / 54.0x
9.0x104% / 34.9x108% / 39.2x113% / 43.4x115% / 45.5x117% / 47.7x
10.0x99% / 31.1x104% / 34.9x108% / 38.8x110% / 40.7x112% / 42.6x
11.0x95% / 28.0x99% / 31.5x104% / 34.9x106% / 36.7x107% / 38.4x
12.0x91% / 25.4x96% / 28.6x100% / 31.8x102% / 33.3x104% / 34.9x

Covenant Headroom (at 10x Entry, 6.5x Max Leverage)

8.5x
Entry Leverage
1.5x
Pro Forma Leverage
5.0x
Headroom (turns)
77%
EBITDA Cushion

Pro forma EBITDA can decline 77% before the 6.5x covenant trips. RCM uplift reduces leverage from 8.5x to 1.5x, adding 7.0 turns of cushion.

5-Year Value Creation Waterfall

EBITDA trajectory: 3% organic growth + RCM uplift ramp (full run-rate at month 18).

Base EBITDARCM UpliftTotalMargin
Entry$695Kβ€”$695K1.1%
Year 1$715K+$2.2M$2.9M4.7%
Year 2$737K+$3.3M$4.0M6.4%
Year 3$759K+$3.3M$4.0M6.5%
Year 4$782K+$3.3M$4.1M6.5%
Year 5$805K+$3.3M$4.1M6.6%
$6.9M
Entry EV (10x)
$44.9M
Exit EV (11x)
$37.9M
Value Created
$4.1M
Exit EBITDA
$1.1M
Organic Growth
$32.7M
RCM Value Creation
$4.1M
Multiple Expansion

Achievement Sensitivity

What if we only achieve a fraction of each lever? 50% = conservative, 75% = base management case, 100% = plan, 120% = stretch.

Lever50%75%100%120%
Cost to Collect$622K$934K$1.2M$1.5M
Denial Rate Reductio$616K$924K$1.2M$1.5M
A/R Days Reduction$379K$568K$757K$909K
Clean Claim Rate$20K$30K$40K$48K
Total$1.6M$2.5M$3.3M$3.9M

Peer Context β€” Where This Hospital Sits

Key metrics vs 45 size-matched peers. Low percentile on margin/efficiency metrics = more room for improvement = larger bridge opportunity.

MetricHospitalP25P50P75Percentile
Op Margin1.1%-9.4%1.2%9.3%
P48
Net-to-Gross60.1%39.6%45.7%58.1%
P84
Occupancy19.7%12.0%24.7%41.3%
P39
Rev/Bed$4.1M$909K$1.7M$2.4M
P91
Exp/Bed$4.1M$873K$1.6M$2.4M
P96

Bridge Methodology

Coefficients calibrated to published research bands: denial 12%β†’5% = $8-15M on $400M NPR. Current metrics estimated from HCRIS public data and ML predictions. Target metrics set at P75 peer benchmarks with 60% gap closure assumption. Revenue levers use NPR Γ— delta Γ— avoidable share. Cost levers use claims volume Γ— cost per reworked claim. Working capital from AR reduction is one-time cash (not included in recurring EBITDA). Returns assume 5.5x leverage, 3% organic growth, 10%/yr debt paydown.

📄 Download ExcelValue TrackerFund LearningHospital ProfileML AnalysisPE ReturnsDCFLBO ModelDeal Screener
Data: HCRIS FY2022 | 6,123 hospitalsSources: HCRISML